Read the article, wasn’t impressed.
The problem with the gun control debate is this: Republican politicians do a HORRIBLE job defending their position because they never mention the reason because they don’t want to give crazy people a green light.
The question about gun control is this: the Second Amendment is intended to protect us from whom? Criminals or the Govt?
Republicans currently (yes, the party was not always controlled by conservatives - Nixon was not a conservative) accepts the position of James Madison, George Mason, Alexander Hamilton, etc in that the 2nd Amendment is meant to protect the people from the govt.
Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist 28 that “if the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense,” a right which he declared to be “paramount.”
Republican politicians hurt their argument because they do not flat out state they view it as a right to protect themselves against the govt. Because the idea that you need to have guns for sport or need AR-15’s to hunt deer is insane. But the idea that you need AR-15s to protect yourself against the govt and to start an insurgency against the federal govt is legit.
But, I doubt you will hear any Republican politicians publicly say, I favor the keeping semi-automatics legal because we might need them to fight another civil war. However, that is the real reason.
Now, with that said, I do agree that private owners have a right to ban guns in the places in places of business (stores, stadiums, malls, etc) and that cities and states have the right to ban guns in state owned buildings – including schools and universities.